SIU Academy® - Official eLearning Portal of SIU (Société Internationale d'Urologie)

1. Cooperberg MR, Broering JM, Carroll PR. Time trends and local variation in primary treatment of localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:1117-23. 2. Wilt TJ, MacDonald R, Rutks I, Shamliyan TA, Taylor BC, Kane RL. Systematic review: comparative effectiveness and harms of treatments for clinically localized prostate cancer. Ann Intern Med 2008;148:435-48. [Erratum, Ann Intern Med 2008;148:888.] 3. Thompson I, Thrasher JB, Aus G, et al. Guideline for the management of clinically localized prostate cancer: 2007 update. Linthicum, MD: American Urological Association Education and Research, 2007 (http://www.auanet.org/content/clinical-practice-guidelines/clinical-guidelines/main-reports/proscan07/content.pdf). 4. SEER cancer statistics review 1975–2004. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute, 2007 (http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2004). 5. Iversen P, Madsen PO, Corle DK. Radical prostatectomy versus expectant treatment for early carcinoma of the prostate: twenty-three year follow-up of a prospective randomized study. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl 1995;172:65-72. 6. Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Ruutu M, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2011;364:1708-17. 7. Widmark A, Tomic R, Modig H, et al. Prospective randomized trial comparing external beam radiotherapy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer (T1b-T2, pN0, grade 1-2, M0). Presented at the 53rd Annual ASTRO Meeting, Miami Beach, FL, October 2–6, 2011. abstract. 8. Lu-Yao GL, Albertsen PC, Moore DF, et al. Outcomes of localized prostate cancer following conservative management. JAMA 2009;302:1202-9. 9. Wilt TJ, Brawer MK, Barry MJ, et al. The Prostate cancer Intervention Versus Observation Trial: VA/NCI/AHRQ Cooperative Studies Program 407 (PIVOT): design and baseline results of a randomized controlled trial comparing radical prostatectomy to watchful waiting for men with clinically localized prostate cancer. Contemp Clin Trials 2009;30:81-7. 10. Fleming ID, Cooper JS, Henson DE, et al., eds. AJCC cancer staging manual. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1997. 11. Allison PD. Survival analysis using the SAS system: a practical guide. Cary, NC: SAS Institute, 1995:292. 12. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales K, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987;40:373-83. 13. Gleason DF. The Veteran’s Administration Cooperative Urologic Research Group: histologic grading and clinical staging of prostatic carcinoma. In: Tannenbaum M, ed. Urologic pathology: the prostate. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger, 1977:171-98. 14. D’Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized p 15. Welch HG, Albertsen P. Prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment after the introduction of prostate-specific antigen testing. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009;101:1325-9. 16. Thompson IM, Klotz L. Active surveillance for prostate cancer. JAMA 2010;304: 2411-2. 17. Hayes JH, Ollendorf DA, Pearson SD, et al. Active surveillance compared with initial treatment for men with low-risk prostate cancer: a decision analysis. JAMA 2010;304:2373-80. [Erratum, JAMA 2011; 305:1862.] 18. Cooperberg MR, Broering JM, Kantoff PW, Carroll PR. Contemporary trends in low risk prostate cancer: risk assessment and treatment. J Urol 2007;178:S14-S19. 19. Fleming C, Wasson JH, Albertsen PC, Barry MJ, Wennberg JE. A decision analysis of alternative treatment strategies for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 1993;269:2650-8. 20. Djulbegovic M, Beyth RJ, Neuberger MM, et al. Screening for prostate cancer: systematic review and metaanalysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 2010; 341:c4543. 21. Andriole GL, Crawford ED, Grubb RL 3rd, et al. Prostate cancer screening in the randomized Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial: mortality results after 13 years of follow-up. J Natl Cancer Inst 2012;104:125-32. 22. Schröder F, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, et al. Prostate-cancer mortality at 11 years of follow-up. N Engl J Med 2012;366:981-90. 23. Coen JJ, Feldman AS, Smith MR, Zietman AL. Watchful waiting for localized prostate cancer in the PSA era: what have been the triggers for intervention? BJU Int2011;107:1582-6. 24. Ganz PA, Barry JM, Burke W, et al. National Institutes of Health State-of-the-Science Conference: role of active surveillance in the management of men with localized prostate cancer. Ann Intern Med 2012;156:591-5. 25. Dubben HH. Trials of prostate-cancer screening are not worthwhile. Lancet Oncol 2009;10:294-8. 26. Schellhammer P, Cockett A, Boccon-Gibod L, et al. Assessment of endpoints for clinical trials for localized prostate cancer. Urology 1997;49:27-38. 27. Newschaffer CJ, Otani K, McDonald MK, Penberthy LT. Causes of death in elderly prostate cancer patients and in a comparison nonprostate cancer cohort. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92:613-21. 28. Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Filén F, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in localized prostate cancer: the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group-4 randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008;100:1144-54. 29. Shao Y-H, Demissie K, Shih W, et al. Contemporary risk profile of prostate cancer in the United States. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009;101:1280-3. 30. Wilt TJ, Shamliyan T, Taylor B, et al. Comparative effectiveness of therapies for clinically localized prostate cancer: comparative effectiveness review number 13. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, February 2008 (http://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/repFiles/2008_0204ProstateCancerFinal.pdf). 31. Eastham JA, Kattan MW, Riedel E, et al. Variations among individual surgeons in the rate of positive surgical margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 2003;170:2292-5. 32. Obek C, Sadek S, Lai S, Civantos F, Rubinowicz D, Soloway MS. Positive surgical margins with radical retropubic prostatectomy: anatomic site-specific pathologic analysis and impact on prognosis. Urology 1999;54:682-8. 33. Ohori M, Wheeler TM, Kattan MW, Goto Y, Scardino PT. Prognostic significance of positive surgical margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 1995;154:1818-24. 34. Swindle P, Eastham JA, Ohori M, et al. Do margins matter? The prognostic significance of positive surgical margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 2005;174:903-7. 35. Vis AN, Schröder FH, van der Kwast

BACKGROUND:The effectiveness of surgery versus observation for men with localized prostate cancer detected by means of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing is not known. METHODS:From November 1994 through January 2002, we randomly assigned 731 men with localized prostate cancer (mean age, 67 years; median PSA value, 7.8 ng per milliliter) to radical prostatectomy or observation and followed them through January 2010. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality; the secondary outcome was prostate-cancer mortality. RESULTS:During the median follow-up of 10.0 years, 171 of 364 men (47.0%) assigned to radical prostatectomy died, as compared with 183 of 367 (49.9%) assigned to observation (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 1.08; P=0.22; absolute risk reduction, 2.9 percentage points). Among men assigned to radical prostatectomy, 21 (5.8%) died from prostate cancer or treatment, as compared with 31 men (8.4%) assigned to observation (hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.36 to 1.09; P=0.09; absolute risk reduction, 2.6 percentage points). The effect of treatment on all-cause and prostate-cancer mortality did not differ according to age, race, coexisting conditions, self-reported performance status, or histologic features of the tumor. Radical prostatectomy was associated with reduced all-cause mortality among men with a PSA value greater than 10 ng per milliliter (P=0.04 for interaction) and possibly among those with intermediate-risk or high-risk tumors (P=0.07 for interaction). Adverse events within 30 days after surgery occurred in 21.4% of men, including one death. CONCLUSIONS:Among men with localized prostate cancer detected during the early era of PSA testing, radical prostatectomy did not significantly reduce all-cause or prostate-cancer mortality, as compared with observation, through at least 12 years of follow-up. Absolute differences were less than 3 percentage points. (Funded by the Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program and others; PIVOT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00007644.).